On 03/23/2010 11:31 PM, Zeev Suraski wrote:
> It's not clear at all. In fact I think it was very clear that using
> php.ini syntax (together with sections if necessary) is very much an
> option, and I think mostly everyone here leaned towards it.
Just take a look at it:
http://svn.php.net/viewvc/php/php-src/branches/PHP_5_3_FPM/sapi/fpm/php-fpm.conf.in?revision=292487&view=markup
How do you propose to describe the same set of options using php.ini syntax?
Yes, simple things like "value=Yes/No" or "value=DIR" fit just fine into
php.ini.
But how would decribe a set of pools each with its own set of options?
(taking into account that some of these options may override global options)
Last time I heard it was proposed to use copy/paste to add 'global' options to each pool
=)
> By using syntax we're using everywhere else for configuration,
> instead of introducing a brand new one.
This is not a php.ini, this is a different config file for a different service.
You don't expect Apache to switch to php.ini syntax just because it's nice and familiar,
do you?
> .ini is also easier than XML for mere mortals.
Now I was never an XML fan myself, but I think THIS particular XML config file
is even easier to read and understand than php.ini.
--
Wbr,
Antony Dovgal
---
http://pinba.org - realtime statistics for PHP